Healthy Skepticism Library item: 8986

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

Publication type: Journal Article

Tanne JH.
Merck appeals rofecoxib verdict
BMJ 2007 Mar 24; 334:(7594):607
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/334/7594/607

Abstract:

Merck will appeal against the decision that a New Jersey state court jury made on 12 March to award compensatory and punitive damages of $47.5m (£24.4m; 35.7m) to an Idaho man, Frederick Humeston, and his wife Mary, for a heart attack he had in 2001, when he was 56.

The damages, awarded after the retrial of an earlier case that Mr Humeston lost, were $18m to Mr Humeston, $2m to his wife, and $27.5 in punitive damages. The jury decided that Merck was negligent in not warning Mr Humeston of the risk of taking rofecoxib (Vioxx).

Merck voluntarily withdrew rofecoxib, a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor, from the market on 30 September 2004 because it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes (BMJ 2005;329:816).

Merck faces more than 27 000 lawsuits related to rofecoxib, including about 120 from the United Kingdom. The company has said it will fight each one and . . .